Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00504
Original file (ND04-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT




ex-ADAR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00504

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040203. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Disabled American Veterans.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040922. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “Due to the fact that I was an Honorable Sailor.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (Disabled American Veterans):

2. “Dear Chairperson:

After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable.

The FSM served on active service from October 1, 1996 to November 24, 1998 at which time he was discharged due to Misconduct.

The FSM requests equitable relief in the form of a discharge upgrade due to the fact that he was an Honorable Sailor.

As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C.

Additionally, a review of the case for any improprieties, an impropriety will be held to exist when there is an error of fact, law, procedures, or discretion associated with the discharge at the time of issuance; and that the rights of the Applicant were prejudiced thereby ( such error shall [and does] constitute prejudicial error, as we believe there is doubt that the discharge would have remained the same if the error had not been made, to include any changes in Navy policy made expressly retroactive to this type of discharge under consideration. See, 32 CFR 724.902.

We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision. These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the Applicant.

Respectfully,”


Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     951025 - 961002  COG
         Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 961003               Date of Discharge: 981124

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 01 22
         Inactive: None

Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55

Highest Rate: ADAA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: NMA*        Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

Military Decorations: None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

* No marks available for review

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980628:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
Award: Restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.


980629:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. [Date extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 981011.]

980804:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Fail to go to appointed place of duty on 0630, 980702, to wit: restricted muster, (2) Fail to go to appointed place of duty on 0630, 980712, to wit: restricted muster.
         Award: Bread and water for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

980928:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty. No further information found in service record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 981011.]

981007:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

981007:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation

981011:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19981123 with a general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1. When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for violations of Articles 86 and 92 of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief denied.

Issue 2. To permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review. There was nothing in the records, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.


PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT


If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at afls14.jag.af.mil ”.

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01057

    Original file (ND00-01057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 970930 - 980615 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980616 Date of Discharge: 990905 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 20 Inactive: None to wit: wrongfully having personal gear...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01125

    Original file (ND02-01125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990424 - 990527 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990528 Date of Discharge: 011105 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 05 08 Inactive: None 011028: Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00773

    Original file (ND01-00773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00773 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). The applicant’s second issue states: “(American Legion's Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01286

    Original file (ND02-01286.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01286 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.001128: Vacate the remaining month of suspended forfeiture of $503.00 for 1 month awarded at CO's NJP dated 001027 due to continued misconduct.010127: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 010108. After a thorough review of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00091

    Original file (ND03-00091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.990404: Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Indebtedness), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.990406: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 2359,, 990401 to 2200, 990402, violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs): Dishonorably failing to maintain funds on 981020 and 981028, total of $20.00. The Applicant states...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00240

    Original file (ND04-00240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged in absentia 20021205 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). The Board does not automatically upgrade a discharge after six months.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00902

    Original file (ND03-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00748

    Original file (ND00-00748.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    990408: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Failure to obey an order, violation of UCMJ Article 117: Provoking speeches or gestures.Award: Forfeiture of $479.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1. After review of the applicant’ service record the NDRB found an administrative error in the reason for discharge for a pattern of misconduct. The applicant’s service record clearly documents the applicant’s misconduct that included two NJP’s with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01064

    Original file (ND02-01064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01064 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020728, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. We also respectfully request that the board consider each reasonable explanation submitted by the (FSM) who now wishes to correct the General character of his discharge from Misconduct (Under Other Than Honorable) Discharge to a General Discharge (Under Honorable Conditions). Documentation In addition to the service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01208

    Original file (ND03-01208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 000320 - 000522 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 000523 Date of Discharge:...